HIGHLY QUALIFIED TEACHERS AND
IMPROVING TEACHER QUALITY STATE GRANTS (ESEA TITLE II, PART A)
MONITORING REPORT
South Carolina Department of Education
May 11-12, 2010
U.S. Department of Education Monitoring Team:
Michelle Meier
Adrienne von Glatz (Westat)
South Carolina Department of Education (SCDE):
Mark Bounds, Deputy Superintendent, Educator Quality and Leadership
Deborah Larkin, Title II, Part A Coordinator
Dr. Allison Jacques, Director of Educator Preparation, Support and Assessment
Jim Turner, Director, Office of Educator Certification
Dr. Falicia Harvey, Coordinator of Alternative Certification
Wendy Spivey, Director, Educator Information Management
Marlene Metts, Director, Exceptional Children
Steve Abbott, Title I Coordinator
Dr. Kathy Meeks, ADEPT Coordinator
Marta Burgin, EDFacts/CCD Coordinator, Office of Technology
Susan Flanagan, Project Accounting Manager, Office of Finance
Shonda Pooser, Project Accountant, Office of Finance
Melissa Austin, Audits Manager, Office of Finance, District Auditing and Field Services
Dennis Dotterer, Executive Director, SC TAP System
Carolyn Ash, Administrative Assistant
State Agency for Higher Education:
Dr. Gail Morrison, Deputy Director, SC Commission on Higher Education and Director, Academic Affairs and Licensing
Dr. Paula Gregg, Program Manager, Academic Affairs and Licensing
Gary Glenn, Director, Finance, Facilities and MIS
LEAs participating in the monitoring visit:
- Horry County Schools(telephone interview)
- Spartanburg School District Two(telephone interview)
- Anderson School District One(telephone interview)
Overview:
Number of LEAs: 86
Number of Schools: 1,133
Number of Teachers: 39,629
State Allocation (FY 2007[1]) $37,100,520State Allocation (FY 2008[2]) $37,978,750
LEA Allocation (FY 2007) $34,893,039LEA Allocation (FY 2008) $35,719,015
“State Activities” (FY 2007) $918,238 “State Activities” (FY 2008) $939,974
SAHE Allocation (FY 2007) $918,238 SAHE Allocation (FY 2008) $939,974
SEA Administration (FY 2007) $325,035 SEA Administration (FY 2008) $332,788
SAHE Administration (FY 2007) $45,970 SAHE Administration (FY 2008) $46,999
Scope of Review:
Like all State educational agencies (SEAs), the South Carolina Department of Education, as a condition of receiving funds under Title I, Part A and Title II, Part A of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA),provided an assurance to the U.S. Department of Education (the Department) that it would administer these programs in accordance with all applicable statutory and regulatory requirements, including those in Title I, Part A that concern “Highly Qualified Teachers” (HQT) and those that govern the use of Title II, Part A funds. See §9304(a)(1) of the ESEA. One of the specific requirements the Department established for an SEA’s receipt of program funds under its consolidated state application (§9302(b)) was submission to the Department of annual data on how well the State has been meeting its performance target for Performance Indicator 3.1: “The percentage of classes being taught by ‘highly qualified’ teachers (as the term is defined in §9101(23) of the ESEA), in the aggregate and in ‘high-poverty’ schools (as the term is defined in §1111(h)(1)(C)(viii) of the ESEA).”
The Department’s monitoring visit to South Carolina had two purposes. One was to review the progress of the State in meeting the ESEA’s HQT requirements. The second was to review the use of ESEA Title II, Part A funds by the SEA, selected LEAs and the State agency for higher education (SAHE), to ensure that the funds are being used to prepare, retain and recruit high-quality teachers and principals so that all children will achieve to a high academic achievement standard and to their full potential.
Summary of Monitoring Indicators
State Educational AgencyCritical Element / Requirement / Citation / Status / Page
I.1. / The State has established appropriate HQT requirements for all teachers who teach core subjects. / §9101(23) / Recommendations / 5
I.2. / The State has established appropriate HQT requirements for specialeducationteachers who teach core academic subjects. / §602(10) of the IDEA / Recommendation / 5
I.3. / Teachers who are enrolled in approved alternative certification programs AND who have already earned a bachelor’s degree AND successfully demonstrated subject matter competence may be counted as highly qualified for a period of three years. / (34 CFR 200.56(a)(2)(ii)) / Met Requirement / NA
I.4. / The SEA ensures that all teachers hired after the first day of the 2002-2003 school year to teach in Title I programs were highly qualified at the time of hire. / §1119(a)(1) / Commendation / 5
I.5. / The SEA ensures that all teachers paid with Title II, Part A funds for class size reduction are highly qualified. / §2123(a)(2)(B) / Met Requirement / NA
I.6. / The SEA ensures that all LEAs that receive Title I funds notify parents of their right to request and receive information on the qualifications of their children’s teachers. / §1111(h)(6)(A) / Met Requirement / NA
I.7. / The SEA ensures that all schools that receive Title I funds notify parents when their children are taught by teachers who are not highly qualified. / §1111(h)(6)(B)(ii) / Met Requirement / NA
II.A.1. / The SEA reports annually to the Secretary in the Consolidated Performance Report (CSPR) the number and percentage of classes taught by highly qualified teachers, in the aggregate and in high- and low-poverty schools. / §1111(h)(4)(G) / Commendation / 6
II.B.1. / The SEA has published an annual report card with the required teacher information. / §1111(h)(1)(c)(viii) / Met Requirements / NA
II.B.2. / The SEA has ensured that LEAs have published annual report cards with the required teacher information for both the LEA and the schools it serves. / §1111(h)(2)(B) / Met Requirements / NA
III.A.1. / The SEA ensures that each LEA that has not met annual measurable objectives for highly qualified teachers for two consecutive years has an improvement plan in place and that the SEA has provided technical assistance to the LEA in formulating the plan. / §2141(a) and §2141(b) / Commendation / 6
III.A.2. / The SEA enters into an agreement on the use of funds with any LEA that has not made progress toward meeting its annual measurable objectives in meeting the highly qualified teacher challenge for three consecutive years and has also failed to make AYP for three years. / §2141(c) / Recommendation / 6
III.B.1. / The SEA has a plan in place to ensure that poor and minority students are not taught at higher rates than other students by inexperience, unqualified, or out-of-field teachers. / §1111(b)(8)(C) / Recommendation / 6
III.B.2. / The SEA ensures that LEA plans include an assurance that through the implementation of various strategies, poor and minority students are not taught at higher rates than other students by inexperienced, unqualified, or out-of-field teachers. / §1112(c)(1)(L) / Finding / 7
IV.A.1. / Once hold harmless provisions are taken into consideration, the SEA allocated additional funds to LEAs using the most recent Census Bureau data found at / §2121(a) / Met Requirement / NA
IV.A.2. / The SEA has ensured that LEAs have completed assessments of local needs for professional development. / §2122(c) / Met Requirement / NA
IV.A.3. / To be eligible for Title II, Part A funds, LEAs must “submit an application to the State educational agency at such time, in such manner, and containing such information as the State educational agency may reasonably require.” / §2122(b) / Met Requirement / NA
IV.B.1. / The SEA has ensured that LEAs maintain effort. / §9521 / Met Requirement / NA
IV.B.2. / The SEA ensures that LEA funds do not supplant other, non-Federal funds. / §2123(b) / Met Requirement / NA
IV.B.3. / The SEA and LEAs are audited, as required by EDGAR §80.26. / EDGAR §80.26 / Met Requirement / NA
IV.B.4. / The SEA regularly and systematically monitors LEAs for compliance with Federal statutes and regulations, applicable State rules and policies, and the approved sub grantee application, as required by EDGAR §76.770 and§80.40(a). / EDGAR §76.770 and§80.40(a) / Met Requirement / NA
IV.B.5. / The SEA ensures that LEAs comply with requirements with regards to services to eligible nonpublic schools. / §9501 / Met Requirement / NA
V.1. / The SEA ensures that state level activity funds are expended on allowable activities. / §2113(c) / Commendation / 7
V.2. / The SEA ensures that state level activity funds do not supplant other, non-Federal funds. / §2113(f) / Met Requirement / NA
V.3. / The SEA complies with requirements with regards to services to eligible nonpublic schools using State-level activity funds. / §9501 / Recommendation / 7
State Agency for Higher Education
Critical Element / Requirement / Citation / Status / Page
1. / The SAHE manages a competition to award grants to carry out appropriate professional development activities. / §2132 and §2133 / Met Requirement / NA
2. / The SAHE works in conjunction with the SEA (if the two are separate agencies) in awarding the grants. / §2132(a) / Recommendation / 7
3. / The SAHE awards grants only to eligible partnerships that include at least an institution of higher education and the division of the institution that prepares teachers and principals; a school of arts and sciences; and a high-need LEA. / §2131 / Met Requirement / NA
4. / The SAHE ensures that each partnership awarded a grant engages in eligible activities. / §2134 / Met Requirement / NA
5. / The SAHE has procedures in place to ensure that no partner uses more than 50 percent of the funds in the grant. / §2132(c) / Commendation / 8
6. / The SAHE regularly and systematically monitors grantees for compliance with Federal statutes and regulations, applicable State rules and policies, and the approved sub grantee application, as required by EDGAR §76.770 and§80.40(a) / EDGAR §76.770 and§80.40(a) / Recommendation
Commendation / 8
Area I: HQT Definitions and Procedures
Critical Element I.1: The State has established appropriate HQT requirements for all teachers who teach core subjects.
Citation: §9101(23)
Recommendation 1: The State should consider modifying its teacher evaluation system (ADEPT), when it is used as the State’s HOUSSE, in order to strengthen its usefulness as an assessment of subject matter competence.
Recommendation 2: The State should clarify the circumstances under which veteran teachers can use HOUSSE to demonstrate subject matter competence and publish this information, perhaps on the SCDE’s web site, to guide LEAs and others who rely on the Department’s guidance.
Critical Element I.2: The State has established appropriate HQT requirements for special education teachers who teach core academic subjects.
Citation: §602(10) of the IDEA
Recommendation: The State should simplify and clarify guidance and documents on paths to highly qualified status for special education teachers. For example, it could separate the requirements that apply to elementary teachers from those that apply to secondary teachers and requirements for new teachers from those for veteran teachers.
Critical Element I.4:The SEA ensures that all teachers hired after the first day of the 2002-2003 school year to teach in Title I programs were highly qualified at the time of hire.
Citation: §1119(a)(1)
Commendation:The State uses an integrated data system to collect, verify and report highly qualified teacher data. This password-protected web-based system combines teacher experience, testing, and licensing data to provide detailed data on the highly qualified status of each teacher. LEAs can access the system to determine the status of teachers.
Area II: HQT Data Reporting and Verification
Critical Element II.A.1: The SEA reports annually to the Secretary in the Consolidated Performance Report (CSPR) the number and percentage of classes taught by highly qualified teachers, in the aggregate and in high- and low-poverty schools.
Citation: §1111(h)(4)(G)
Commendation: The information in the state data system is entered at the state level, thus ensuring a high degree of accuracy and reliability.
Area III: HQT Plans
Critical Element III.A.1: The SEA ensures that each LEA that has not met annual measurable objectives for highly qualified teachers for two consecutive years has an improvement plan in place and that the SEA has provided technical assistance to the LEA in formulating the plan.
Citation:§2141(a) and §2141(b)
Commendation: The State provides a high level of technical assistance to LEAs regarding appropriate highly qualified teacher improvement plans. State department staff members are very responsive to the needs of LEAs.
Critical Element III.A.2: The SEA enters into an agreement on the use of funds with any LEA that has not made progress toward meeting its annual measurable objectives in meeting the highly qualified teacher challenge for three consecutive years and has also failed to make AYP for three years.
Citation: §2141(c)
Recommendation: The State should consider a more prominent notification to LEAs regarding restrictions on hiring Title I-funded paraprofessionals when LEAs are subject to Section 2141(c). The language should be included in the written agreement with the LEAs, and the Title II office should work more closely with the Title I office to ensure compliance.
Critical Element III.B.1: The SEA has a plan in place to ensure that poor and minority students are not taught at higher rates than other students by inexperienced, unqualified or out-of-field teachers.
Citation: §1111(b)(8)(C)
Recommendation: The State should identify additional data beyond aggregate state-wide highly qualified teacher status to measure the equitable distribution of teachers in its plan to ensure that poor and minority students are not taught at higher rates than other students by inexperienced, unqualified, or out-of-field teachers. The State should regularly use these data elements to measure and report on its progress in ensuring the equitable distribution of teachers.
Critical Element III.B.2: The SEA ensures that LEA plans include an assurance that through the implementation of various strategies, poor and minority students are not taught at higher rates than other students by inexperienced, unqualified, or out-of-field teachers.
Citation:§1112(c)(1)(L)
Finding: Though the State requires that LEA plans include an assurance that LEAs have effective strategies in place to ensure that poor and minority children are not taught at higher rates by the aforementioned teachers, the State does not systematically monitor this and is not able to ensure that LEAs have and are implementing these strategies.
Further Action Required: Within 30 days, the State must submit a plan and a timeline to the Department detailing how it will ensure that assurances from LEAs are backed up by appropriate activities and strategies.
Area V: Title II, Part A State-Level Activities
Critical Element V.1: The SEA ensures that state level activity funds are expended on allowable activities.
Citation:§2113(c)
Commendation: The spending of state activities funds is focused and targeted, with the majority allocated to the statewide Teacher Advancement Program. This program focuses on teacher effectiveness in high need schools by providing schoolwide support and development for teachers.
Critical Element V.3: The SEA complies with requirements with regards to services to eligible nonpublic schools using State-level activity funds.
Citation: §9501
Recommendation: The State should implement a more formalized plan for outreach and inclusion of non-public schools in the use of state-level activity funds.
State Agency for Higher Education
Critical Element 2: The SAHE works in conjunction with the SEA (if the two are separate agencies) in awarding the grants.
Citation: §2132(a)
Recommendation: The SAHE should work with the SEA when setting priorities for awarding grants.
Critical Element 5: The SAHE has procedures in place to ensure that no partner uses more than 50 percent of the funds in the grant.
Citation: §2132(c)
Commendation: The SAHE promotes the importance of the 50 percent rule and uses it effectively to further strong partnerships with grantees.
Critical Element 6: The SAHE regularly and systematically monitors grantees for compliance with Federal statutes and regulations, applicable State rules and policies, and the approved sub grantee application, as required by EDGAR §76.770 and §80.40(a).
Citation: EDGAR §76.770 and§80.40(a)
Recommendation: The SAHE should consider having grantees include rosters of participants, or daily attendance tallies, in their interim reports as an additional means of monitoring program effectiveness.
Commendation: The SAHE engages in regular and systematic monitoring to ensure compliance and effectiveness. This includes multiple site visits and comprehensive regular reporting.
1
[1] FY 2007 funds are those that became available to the State on July 1, 2007.
[2] FY 2008 funds are those that became available to the State on July 1, 2008.